Florida insurers just lost a key litigation shield on older property policies after a state appeals court widened an already deep DCA split.
On May 20, 2026, the First District Court of Appeal reversed a Bradford County trial court that had dismissed homeowner Mary Priest's lawsuit against State Farm Florida Insurance Company. The trial judge tossed the case because Priest had skipped the pre-suit notice required by section 627.70152(3)(a) of Florida Statutes. The First DCA said the statute never applied to her policy in the first place.
Priest renewed her State Farm homeowner's policy on January 6, 2021. A few months later, wind and water damaged her property. She filed a claim, the two sides disagreed on coverage and the amount of the loss, and she sued for breach of contract and declaratory relief. The pre-suit notice statute did not take effect until July 1, 2021 – after her policy was already in place.
The statute requires a claimant to give the state department written notice of intent to litigate, at least 10 business days before filing suit, and only after the insurer has made a coverage determination.
State Farm argued the law sweeps in every suit arising under a residential or commercial property policy, regardless of when the policy was issued. The First DCA disagreed. The court pointed to the word "exclusively" in the same sentence, saying it limits the statute to a category of suits rather than reaching back in time. It also noted the Legislature wrote "suits" instead of "policies" – a meaningful choice, because Florida Supreme Court precedent tells courts to look at the policy date, not the suit date, when deciding whether an insurance statute applies retroactively.
State Farm also pointed to legislative history. An earlier draft, House Bill 305, would have applied the law only to policies issued or renewed on or after July 1, 2021. That line was dropped from the version that became Senate Bill 76. The First DCA said dropping language that would have limited the statute is not the same as adding language that extends it backward. The court leaned on the Florida Supreme Court's view that silence about existing contracts is not clear evidence of retroactive intent.
The ruling sharpens an already messy split. The Third DCA in Cantens v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's London and the Fourth DCA in Cole v. Universal Property & Casualty Insurance Co. have read the statute to reach back to older policies. The Second, Fifth, and Sixth DCAs have refused to do so. The First DCA has now joined that side and certified conflict with the Third and Fourth.
The Florida Supreme Court is already reviewing the question in Hughes v. Universal Property & Casualty Insurance Co. under its conflict jurisdiction.
Judge Winokur wrote a special concurrence agreeing the statute lacks any retroactive language – and adding that even if it did, applying it backward would be unconstitutional under the reasoning in Hughes.
For carriers, the practical effect is immediate. On any Florida property policy issued or renewed before July 1, 2021, insurers in the First, Second, Fifth, and Sixth DCAs lose the pre-suit notice statute as a gatekeeper. Motions to dismiss built on that ground will not survive for legacy policies in those districts. The Third and Fourth DCAs still hold the door open. The Florida Supreme Court's ruling in Hughes will eventually settle the question statewide.
